So what happened to that war? Huh? SAY WHAT?! NUH UH!!!

[Augustus Autumn]

The OP totaly and naivey disregards the success of the Coincidence Coalition's diplomacy that avoided total war that a lot of people did not. Well done.

The OP happily indicates the statements from Ragnorok government which indicate the Coalition's efforts were less effective than Rebbilon's against the Orange Defense Network.

[LiquidMercury]

I still don't see a victory here beyond The Phoenix Federation not being smashed flat for the actions of its government. If victory is being measured by survival then, sure, I guess it's a victory but not one that I'm going to recognize. I think we've talked this one back and forth enough to leave it be. Also, the responsibility isn't yours to take - it rests with the leaders of eighteen alliances out there. It was their choice to make, not yours.

Except when posturing is called out for being what it is, posturing. A lot of your coalition's membership presence within these forums took a very aggressive stance which, in turn, brought out the usual round of "Bring it!" remarks. In response, the coalition's membership made lots of fun statements like "Just you wait" and the like. When it came time a lot of words flew up and then nothing happened except SG going home with the spoils of war.

Add to this the assertion by Hoo that the actions of the coalition were ultimately meaningless. If that's the case then the war was not "won on the boards". Maybe it was won in some back channel via the IRC communications network but it certainly wasn't won by the efforts of nations working together. Whatever happened, the posturing undertaken by your coalition doesn't seem to have done anything but make a lot of people look very foolish. And, for what it's worth, that's a right-royal shame.

I think my bafflement on the admission thing comes not from you saying that both sides buggered this but that nobody else has. Barring you becoming the Voice of Coincidence (doesn't sound as cool as the Wrath of Karma but what can you do?) it's going to take some of the bigger players saying it for it to stick. For what it's worth, yes, both sides dig screw up and badly. That it didn't escalate likely has a lot to do with people showing up (read: treaty partners), tapping them on the head somewhere along the line and asking them what was going on. As for defining the battlefield, the 'verse has a pretty solid definition where it exists. These forums of debate, while open to comparison, are not the battlefield. That's the place where bullets fly, artillery booms and nuclear fire keeps us all warm.

People want to win.

National rulers like myself participate in the 'verse's political battles because of the conflict, written or otherwise, as well as the clash of arms which occurs. It is that conflict, not the period after the conclusion, which drives us since it promises instability and possibility. However, there is apparently some unwritten credo out there which says that it's only worth getting into one of these pell-mell conflicts if you actually know you're already going to win, thereby removing your chances for any of the actual fun parts. More and more often wars are ending with the masses being disgruntled because nothing is actually thrown into the air. Possibilities are crushed not because of the massive weight of large alliances but because you keep buying into the system imposed. If you truly want constant war with periodic breaks then you, sir, have the means available to you. Go out and find your path if that is the one you wish to tread.

Part 1: Sometimes it's the little victories that count. Sometimes it truly is about not being smashed, just like the new alliance fights for it's survival, it's ability to succeed and thrive and ultimately survive, sometimes the big alliances have to as well. A small victory is not an absolute victory. Absolute victory comes when the desired reaction comes about in a manner that is satisfactory to all leaving no room for discussion as to what the victory was about. This is far from an absolute victory for anyone. The alliances placed their trust in me and gave me the ability to lead so therefore it is my responsibility to take for that course of action (the delay). Are there other aspects and issues that others could take responsibility for that have not done so? Of course. What these actions are, are up to discussion. I will not be expressing my opinion on that though.

Part 2: While I agree that posturing for posturing sake is pointless and dumb, when used effectively and in the right way, it serves a very valid point. An example would be Archon's initial speech terming Karma. It was posturing at it's finest, and it served a point (My announcement terming the coalition was not nearly so good and was more of a notification then anything). The mindless drivel of "bring it" and other senseless debates such as the peace mode strategy are posturing for posturing sake and thus serve no definable purpose. This went on by both sides even though I did encourage leaders on our side to keep that to a minimum as it was pointless, redundant and generally just idiotic.

Part 3: I consider IRC an extension of the boards. It was ultimately won there.

Part 4: I do not know if others involved will come out and say that they thought it was all FUBAR such as I did. Though I do speak for the coalition my motives for being there were simply for friends. Since my reasons for being there differed from others (not all), then it is safe to say that my thoughts on the matter will be different from others. Like Archon and I during Karma believed in a better CN and what goes around comes around, others were there simply for revenge on NPO and to lay down the big end of the bat on some people. I can only offer my personal opinions on the matter and know that they are true for some parties as well, but not for all involved.

In regards to the "everyone wants to win": I want to win, I joined that coalition at a time when they would not have won. I joined it knowing that there was most definitely a possibility of losing and that did indeed give me some interest to plan a war where strategy could win out over NS and change the odds to a more favorable condition and end-result. Had I, and others, joined only for a winning cause this coalition would never have come about because in the beginning there was zero hope of a win, by the end there was a slim possibility of a win, nothing was ever definite though I am more optimistic then most about things as I had full projections as to the NS and makeup of it and due to the fact that I believe myself to be good at predicting sides or bringing alliances to a side that I felt they were fairly accurate.

[Kubla Khan]

I like the cut of your jib Mr. Mitsukuni

You know which way the wind is blowing

[LiquidMercury]

well i think this certainly clears up a lot of the speculation surrounding your involvement and pretty much states why i thought you were conducting the preparations.

I may be a neo-moralist (term courtesy of Starfox) but at the same time I'm not going to go jump off to every crusade that needs a military commander. If there is no sense in me being there I would not choose to put myself through the stress of organizing and building a coalition. I'm sure there has been speculation as to why I was there and anytime I saw it that "LM joined to make a statement against Karma" I tried to refute it. I enjoyed Karma for what it was, and if I had disappointment (which I did) of any on the other side that I had previously worked with it was not due to any moralist crusade being continued, not because I felt as though they went against Karma, but because I think they made a new mistake completely separate from anything involving Karma. Just like I feel as though TPF should of just had the slate wiped clean by the other alliances, my involvement in Karma was wiped clean the moment everything ended and my current actions as a coalition organizer and my future actions as a nation leader, possible alliance leader, possible coalition leader, are simply just that. If I feel the need to posture and say "I'm here because I disagree with what you are doing" then I will do so such as I did with Karma but in this case, I was here for friends, though I did not agree with the actions of either side prior to my involvement.

[SiCkO]

LM

love ya!

as to this, i guess CnG decided now isnt the best time in war, ok, we will help TPF and remain content, allies > pleasing the OWF

[Augustus Autumn]

Part 1: Sometimes it's the little victories that count. Sometimes it truly is about not being smashed, just like the new alliance fights for it's survival, it's ability to succeed and thrive and ultimately survive, sometimes the big alliances have to as well. A small victory is not an absolute victory. Absolute victory comes when the desired reaction comes about in a manner that is satisfactory to all leaving no room for discussion as to what the victory was about. This is far from an absolute victory for anyone. The alliances placed their trust in me and gave me the ability to lead so therefore it is my responsibility to take for that course of action (the delay). Are there other aspects and issues that others could take responsibility for that have not done so? Of course. What these actions are, are up to discussion. I will not be expressing my opinion on that though.

Surviving a mess you got yourself into doesn't sound terribly victorious whichever way you paint it. Again, the responsibility for this failure isn't yours to take on - for you to do that implies that alliance leaders are not, in fact, responsible for themselves which leads to a whole other set of issues.

Part 2: While I agree that posturing for posturing sake is pointless and dumb, when used effectively and in the right way, it serves a very valid point. An example would be Archon's initial speech terming Karma. It was posturing at it's finest, and it served a point (My announcement terming the coalition was not nearly so good and was more of a notification then anything). The mindless drivel of "bring it" and other senseless debates such as the peace mode strategy are posturing for posturing sake and thus serve no definable purpose. This went on by both sides even though I did encourage leaders on our side to keep that to a minimum as it was pointless, redundant and generally just idiotic.

I would hazard we're in total agreement here. Nothing I saw in this conflict came within hailing distance of Archon's achievement and was, in fact, precisely the sort of nonsense which you're not seeing here. People used harsh words for no purpose other than to annoy others and then, when called to task, skipped out. Failure on coming through is failure either way you paint it.

Part 3: I consider IRC an extension of the boards. It was ultimately won there.

By a bunch of people in a back channel. I suspect that's part of the problem with the 'verse political scene at large, a lack of communication or accessibility.

Part 4: I do not know if others involved will come out and say that they thought it was all FUBAR such as I did. Though I do speak for the coalition my motives for being there were simply for friends. Since my reasons for being there differed from others (not all), then it is safe to say that my thoughts on the matter will be different from others. Like Archon and I during Karma believed in a better CN and what goes around comes around, others were there simply for revenge on NPO and to lay down the big end of the bat on some people. I can only offer my personal opinions on the matter and know that they are true for some parties as well, but not for all involved.

A rehash of the Karma War or your role in it isn't necessary here. Similarly, your personal motives aren't at stake here otherwise I'd have called you out personally. I called out your alliance in a small and joking fashion instead since I really do like their flag and it gave me a reason to toss it up.

In regards to the "everyone wants to win": I want to win, I joined that coalition at a time when they would not have won. I joined it knowing that there was most definitely a possibility of losing and that did indeed give me some interest to plan a war where strategy could win out over NS and change the odds to a more favorable condition and end-result. Had I, and others, joined only for a winning cause this coalition would never have come about because in the beginning there was zero hope of a win, by the end there was a slim possibility of a win, nothing was ever definite though I am more optimistic then most about things as I had full projections as to the NS and makeup of it and due to the fact that I believe myself to be good at predicting sides or bringing alliances to a side that I felt they were fairly accurate.

There's a difference between winning a battle and winning the political game. The people who want to win the proverbial game, who want to be on the "right" side of every conflict and reap the benefits, they are the ones I fault here. There's nothing wrong with taking on a challenge - there is with bandwagoning, especially when it becomes your standard operating procedure.

[LiquidMercury]

Surviving a mess you got yourself into doesn't sound terribly victorious whichever way you paint it. Again, the responsibility for this failure isn't yours to take on - for you to do that implies that alliance leaders are not, in fact, responsible for themselves which leads to a whole other set of issues.

I would hazard we're in total agreement here. Nothing I saw in this conflict came within hailing distance of Archon's achievement and was, in fact, precisely the sort of nonsense which you're not seeing here. People used harsh words for no purpose other than to annoy others and then, when called to task, skipped out. Failure on coming through is failure either way you paint it.

By a bunch of people in a back channel. I suspect that's part of the problem with the 'verse political scene at large, a lack of communication or accessibility.

A rehash of the Karma War or your role in it isn't necessary here. Similarly, your personal motives aren't at stake here otherwise I'd have called you out personally. I called out your alliance in a small and joking fashion instead since I really do like their flag and it gave me a reason to toss it up.

There's a difference between winning a battle and winning the political game. The people who want to win the proverbial game, who want to be on the "right" side of every conflict and reap the benefits, they are the ones I fault here. There's nothing wrong with taking on a challenge - there is with bandwagoning, especially when it becomes your standard operating procedure.

Part 1: Agreed.

Part 2: Most definitely Agreed

Part 3: If you're in the back channels then all is well, but for those that are not unfortunately information is a lot of half-truths, biased opinions, and pre-conceived notions.

Part 4: I did not take it at all as a personal call out or even a call out on TOP. I was simply stating that others may indeed come out to give their opinions on things, but they may indeed differ from mine. I was using Karma as an example and nothing more to illustrate the point that the speakers are not always in agreement with everyone in the coalition. That though unified under a "common cause" the thoughts and opinions of everyone differ immensely

Part 5. I can absolutely agree to this. I do not feel as any on the TPF side were of the benefit-reaping party. Had white peace not come, global war would of come immediately, and it would have been a very long protracted war damaging to all involved both via PM tactics and hard-damage taken. As I said before, though I do believe we had a possibility of one, it was not as large of a possibility as losing.

[merdesa]

I enjoyed this very much Toku, even though I am even less versed than you are in the political happenings, it's an understandable (and for me I'd say agreeable on most parts) summary of what happened.

Actually I would admit that this was the talking down of sorts for me --I was ready to jump in and have a good time based upon expired deplorable actions from an alliance I have not heard many good things about to begin with; I still was ready to be on that side though, linked to people I do know, and can say I care about.

I think I can say that I have learned something from this "war", in that I share the same sentiment you have on politics and the need for people to hold what they have and go with it; if you want to call it a vendetta then so be it, it works, it's not weighed down with some convoluted sub plot with love affairs and feelings --Feelings!? I was going to donate my infra and tech, my warchest to someones feelings?

I think this may be why I have little to no interest in becoming active in politics, there are the people that play a role as some important person (as seen and addressed by you a few times now in here) but are mostly tools with unattractive personalities.

And yet, dishearteningly, these are the people who will be casting the next wars, and so on.

[Caesius]

Well, since we've seen the perspectives of CC, RoK, and those completely uninvolved, I'll chip in with my simplified and very biased view of what happened as someone on the SG side of things, but who would've been only a secondary party to the conflict:

Dec. 25th:

Athens, RoK, GOD, \m/: Hey guys, we have this great CB against TPF. We don't expect this to get too out of hand, but we know we can count on you guys.

Rest of to-be-SG: Alright, that's cool.

Dec. 26th:

Athens, RoK, GOD, \m/: TPF, you dead.

To-be-CC: INDIGNATION!!

Dec. 27th:

To-be-CC: INDIGNATION!! (but no wars)

Athens, RoK, GOD, \m/: Ok.

Dec. 28th-31st:

To-be-CC: INDIGNATION!! (peace mode warriors)

SG: Um... wtf you guys?

Jan. 1st:

CC: Just... give us a minute while we get our pants on, okay?! (Besides, it's new years, we aren't supposed to be wearing pants!)

SG: lol, ok.

Jan. 2nd:

CC: Behold! PANTS!!

Non-involved SG: omg rofl

CC, Athens, RoK, GOD, \m/: *white peace*

Non-involved SG: ...what the hell?!

In short: CC, Athens, RoK, GOD, and \m/ gyp the rest of us out of what would've been an awesome war. Almost everything about this war went completely against the grain of what is expected from wars on Planet Bob -- the 6-day waiting period for a response from CC, the 18 simultaneous OWF war decs (a record?) with 24 corresponding in-game decs (averages to 1.33 wars per war dec -- another record?), the evenly-matched sides, and the white peace achieved within 24 hours of the counter-declarations (normally counterdecs escalate the conflict, not defuse it, but then with 1.33 wars per war dec these weren't any ordinary counterdecs anyway and were more than likely political leverage to get white peace).

I mean really, this was probably the first potential war since GWII where the sides were pretty much evenly matched. Does CN no longer "do" wars where the outcome may as well be determined by a coin toss? Are we content with curbstomp after curbstomp? I'm not, and frankly I would love to be in a war where the fighting is so bitter that everyone on both sides is reduced to ZI, each believing that their cause is just enough to warrant fighting to the last citizen.

Though, I guess that explains why this fight didn't escalate -- each side thought that their respective causes didn't warrant a global war, and was receptive to white peace. So each side, being rational peacemongers, accepted. ...Dammit, I just rendered this entire post useless in less than a paragraph!

[Xiphosis]

Have to admit, the OP was pretty funny.

[empirica]

Quote 1: Just because a mandatory defense treaty in your mind dictates that it must be activated immediately, does not mean that all parties see it as such. The fact is that TPF was okay with the plan, they agreed to it, had they not and were my [ooc] RL not an issue [ooc] then yes, I do believe that you could say that it would be an issue.

You know I have tons of respect for you from Karma LM. But quite frankly, taking 5-6 days for a field commander from an as yet un-involved alliance is bollocks. I know you are good with this type of thing, so don't take offense. But seriously, with all the allies, and skilled leaders, on that side of the fence, 5-6 days of waiting for one man to return? Seriously?

I'm not saying it would have been smart for the CC side to just jump right in on day 1 in defense. It would have been a PR victory after the failings of the CoC in Karma, but not a PR victory that's likely to win the larger war. So I can understand taking a day or two to get organized, maybe even 3 considering the time of year. But 5-6 days is a bit excessive for a planet that moves pretty quickly in war time.

Quote 2: The victory is that two parties essentially agreed to disagree and left the battle field. Normally, when two parties are in disagreement, are actively engaged, neither leave the field of battle, and most definitely not with white peace. In regards to the peace mode tactic, it was/is a viable tactic to fight in the tiers you want to be in. Could it of been employed more effectively had it not been around the holidays and more alliances were active as a whole? Absolutely. That tactic strategically will work BEST for alliances such as citadel alliances, MK, TSO, and other extremely active (80-90%+ daily activity) alliance types. Trying to fit it to mass-recruiting alliances is harder and less effective. The peace mode tactic was not by any means a sense of apathy, simply a military strategy that I felt gave the best chances for a side with less NS, less nations, less nooks. It gave us a chance, albeit a small one. Though I agree that poor actions on both sides went largely unpunished (TPF did in my mind take their punishment, though it was not deserved as I always believed the slate wiped clean from Karma), sometimes it's better to just say "hey, we both kind of messed up here, lets just walk away and we'll fight another day over something less silly."

I won't disagree with anything here. This whole situation was monumentally stupid, from the circumstances surrounding ZH's foundation to the ensuing non war that gave everyone blue balls.

[potato]

I'm surprising even myself here but that is a bloody good post, Toku-man.

[ChairmanHal]

18 alliances secure 24 attacks. You think people were scared off by that?

Of course it had nothing at all to do with white peace being agreed upon -before- the DoWs came in from the other alliances. That would just be crazy.

You raise an interesting point. By essentially "refusing flank" and placing half (or a bit over half) of their alliances into PM, Athens and Rok presented a rather smaller target. Compound that with traditional "assault" alliances like Valhalla being in what amounted to reserve, and I'm not shocked whatsoever in the small number of DoWs in the initial phases. Had White Peace not happened when it did, you would have seen a radical escalation of the conflict in the next couple of days.

OOC: The timing of the attack on TPF suggests that this was intended to be a "holiday raid", one of those attacks that used to take place when players where sitting at home bored and looking for a short brawl before heading back to school/work/etc. However, it was rather clearly seen by many as an opportunity for another Great War and the threads in the OWF pretty much reflect that. Therefore, while it is believable to me (though I'm not 100% convinced) that there was no "grander plan" in progress on the part of Athens & Co., obviously things were rapidly spinning in another direction and when the opportunity to bail out by giving White Peace presented itself, they went for it. Still, I saw a dress rehearsal, not a one time thing...so in a sense, this ain't over yet, it is just the end of Act I.

[Aeternos Astramora]

This is one of those lovely moments when nobody is actually going to care about the truth regardless of what it is except for maybe me and a handful of other people out there. Let's be very clear concerning the cassus belli proposed by the governments of Athens and Ragnorok.

It was correct.

lol, right. Wars caused by what happened during other wars are stupid.

Shot up, leader off visiting some island somewhere or something, and left out to dry by its allies in its time of needs. Either way you paint it, when an alliance has the person responsible for getting it rolled tootle off and then has all those wonderful people it stood up for sit around scratching their heads like a bunch of primates at the zoo waiting to be fed while hurling half-words it lost. Maybe the next time your government runs around shooting its collective mouth off (Kilkenny, I'm talking to you) it will remember precisely how much it's going to be backed up when the going gets rough. Good luck on this and, for pity's sake, cut it with the spy ops. It didn't work when you sent me out. It didn't work with Zero Hour. I'm sensing a trend here.

I'm glad mhawk didn't stay around Planet Bob. It would have been sad if he had.

With the exceptions of Zenith and The Order Of Light, your showing was utterly and completely pathetic. TPF called on you within twenty-four hours of being attacked. Your response: you sat on your defensive obligations and did nothing except whine. When you were called to ask you tried to act cryptic and then whined some more. When you actually got off your collective rear ends and said you were going to do something you launched twenty-four offensive wars.

You'd think anyone with cognitive abilities would be able to understand that having more alliance DoW's than nation DoW's clearly shows that a blitz wasn't in the plans, so saying they suck at blitz is like saying you suck at dancing in a staring competition.

[Augustus Autumn]

Part 3: If you're in the back channels then all is well, but for those that are not unfortunately information is a lot of half-truths, biased opinions, and pre-conceived notions.

Which is a constant source of complaint and, arguably, what is central to a lot of things wrong with 'verse politics. The disenfranchisement of natioal rulers who are told they essentially must find an alliance to protect them from raiders and then who agree to being coopted into a system where they have no choice and decisions are made but never explained. If anything, the Karma War like this one provided an accessible casus belli where the evidence was given to the public to be considered and digested. It's the resolution which was lacking in any sort of real respect for the common intelligence. And that's on both sides of the line.

Part 4: I did not take it at all as a personal call out or even a call out on TOP. I was simply stating that others may indeed come out to give their opinions on things, but they may indeed differ from mine. I was using Karma as an example and nothing more to illustrate the point that the speakers are not always in agreement with everyone in the coalition. That though unified under a "common cause" the thoughts and opinions of everyone differ immensely

Well said.

Part 5. I can absolutely agree to this. I do not feel as any on the TPF side were of the benefit-reaping party. Had white peace not come, global war would of come immediately, and it would have been a very long protracted war damaging to all involved both via PM tactics and hard-damage taken. As I said before, though I do believe we had a possibility of one, it was not as large of a possibility as losing.

What happened at the closing still was not a victory, my central point despite what others have attempted to push.

I think I can say that I have learned something from this "war", in that I share the same sentiment you have on politics and the need for people to hold what they have and go with it; if you want to call it a vendetta then so be it, it works, it's not weighed down with some convoluted sub plot with love affairs and feelings --Feelings!? I was going to donate my infra and tech, my warchest to someones feelings?

I suspect what you're referring to here is the inability for some to separate 'verse politics and activities from that other evil place we all keep hearing about, that purgatory some theologians keep referring to as "Real Life". For the record, I do not support any existence theories on this "Real Life" nonsense. We at The Last Citadel are scientists.

I mean really, this was probably the first potential war since GWII where the sides were pretty much evenly matched. Does CN no longer "do" wars where the outcome may as well be determined by a coin toss? Are we content with curbstomp after curbstomp? I'm not, and frankly I would love to be in a war where the fighting is so bitter that everyone on both sides is reduced to ZI, each believing that their cause is just enough to warrant fighting to the last citizen.

In short, the answer appears to be yes. Since joining this community back when Norden Verein was being smashed flat none of the war I have witnessed which have involved major alliances have been anything other than one-sided smash fests. The fact that people continue to use words like "honor" and "duty" to dress it up as anything other than self-preservation amuses me to no end. This war had potential to remain low-level, be evenly matched and see some good times occur. Instead people chickened out because victory wasn't assured. A shame, really.

Have to admit, the OP was pretty funny.

The sweetness of humor sometimes helps others swallow the bitterness of truth.

I'm surprising even myself here but that is a bloody good post, Toku-man.

Thank you, Sir Potato.

[Augustus Autumn]

You raise an interesting point. By essentially "refusing flank" and placing half (or a bit over half) of their alliances into PM, Athens and Rok presented a rather smaller target. Compound that with traditional "assault" alliances like Valhalla being in what amounted to reserve, and I'm not shocked whatsoever in the small number of DoWs in the initial phases. Had White Peace not happened when it did, you would have seen a radical escalation of the conflict in the next couple of days.

Unless both sides refused to actually come out and fight. If anything, the tactics you're mentioning gave SG the chance to slip out without taking serious damage in response which would count as more of a military victory for them (but not an overall victory due to the political foul-ups).

OOC: The timing of the attack on TPF suggests that this was intended to be a "holiday raid", one of those attacks that used to take place when players where sitting at home bored and looking for a short brawl before heading back to school/work/etc. However, it was rather clearly seen by many as an opportunity for another Great War and the threads in the OWF pretty much reflect that. Therefore, while it is believable to me (though I'm not 100% convinced) that there was no "grander plan" in progress on the part of Athens & Co., obviously things were rapidly spinning in another direction and when the opportunity to bail out by giving White Peace presented itself, they went for it. Still, I saw a dress rehearsal, not a one time thing...so in a sense, this ain't over yet, it is just the end of Act I.

A dress rehearsal for another one of these repetitive "Great Wars" where alliances engage on a basis of four-on-one and the losing side is demonized while the winning side engages in hypocrisy? We all know it's coming, no suspicion need apply.

lol, right. Wars caused by what happened during other wars are stupid.

You clearly didn't digest the entirety of what was said. The Zero Hour plot was continued past the end of the war, well beyond when it could have been considered reasonable and was correctly assessed in purpose. I won't bother repeating this since if it's not clear now then you and others are simply willingly denying the words you see.

I'm glad mhawk didn't stay around Planet Bob. It would have been sad if he had.

Why? Isn't the place of alliance leaders at the head of their troops, not sitting in peacemode while others play for their mistakes? Or did I miss some alteration in the standards of good behavior?

You'd think anyone with cognitive abilities would be able to understand that having more alliance DoW's than nation DoW's clearly shows that a blitz wasn't in the plans, so saying they suck at blitz is like saying you suck at dancing in a staring competition.

What I'm saying is that the forces of the coalition promised some sort of big to-do with all sorts of veiled threats and little cute phrases. They utterly failed to deliver in any way, shape or form. I don't understand your analogy or how it applies to this situation.

[Galapagos]

Nice post.

Athens must be very happy with you.

What I'm saying is that the forces of the coalition promised some sort of big to-do with all sorts of veiled threats and little cute phrases. They utterly failed to deliver in any way, shape or form. I don't understand your analogy or how it applies to this situation.

Nonsense.

The buildup to the declarations consisted entirely of Archon trying to bait TPF's allies into war unprepared, and us blustering back irrationally and incoherently in return. What he was saying, and you certainly do undertsand it but are intentionally ignoring, is that a big blitz was not in the cards. With such a significant proportion of all alliances in peace mode, anybody with an ounce of objectivity can see that there was no intended blitz.

Edited January 5, 2010 by Galapagos

[Augustus Autumn]

Nice post.

Athens must be very happy with you.

They always are, just like I am with them.

[Kzoppistan]

A biting commentary with many elements of truth included. I'll leave the dissection of the points up to others.

Suffice to say that I think that boredom and the anticipated seasonal adventure plugged many ears to calls for a diplomatic solution.

And the next time I put my trust in a foreign military planner, I will expect, and demand, faster results. I was impressed with the plan when it was finally relayed to us, but the time it took was not up to par, imo.

I was disappointed with the end result as none of the points that caused this mess were adequately addressed by the primary participants. That left quite an undesirable taste in my mouth.

Over all, a good read.

Edited January 5, 2010 by Kzoppistan

[The AUT]

Well I'll admit I played a key roll in helping our side set up our military plan.

Desperado and co. set up a military channel with a few people just planning to enter next update in defense of TPF. However I advised against it and played a key roll in convincing our side to set up a milcom with a strategy to win or at least cause a Phyrric victory to the other side. A milcom was set up, I didn't take part in it, and they kept delaying the war. What became one day, became two. What became three days, became four. Myself and other key milcom representatives got into it but cooler heads prevailed and the plans made out to blitz on the night of the 1st.

The objective was not to march into battles as martyrs and sheep ready for the slaugther, rather an organized coalition that would put up a big fight. Had I not been in peace mode I would've taken on an Athens/Rok/\m/ nation respectively, it was just the cards we were told to play that didn't allow for it.

The plan was to win the war then force all who attacked TPF to pay reps. However when peace was being reached mhawk pressed for white peace to set an example. He didn't want to be like the other side, and the call went out to TPF's allies that should the accept white peace would we stand by the decision. The vote was pretty much unanimous and TPF accepted white peace willingly rather than reluctantly.

Hoo: Why declare on TPF if you had no intentions of escalating this into a Great War and going the distance? You had to have known declaring on TPF would receive staunch resistance, that just doesn't make sense to me. Don't create such a war if you've no intentions of being in the heart and going the distance in a Great War.

Edited January 5, 2010 by The AUT

[Augustus Autumn]

The plan was to win the war then force all who attacked TPF to pay reps. However when peace was being reached mhawk pressed for white peace to set an example. He didn't want to be like the other side, and the call went out to TPF's allies that should the accept white peace would we stand by the decision. The vote was pretty much unanimous and TPF accepted white peace willingly rather than reluctantly.

So wait. Even though the grand coalition battle plan put into motion at the behest of TPF was to punch SG in the teeth and get reps, TPF backed off the plan in order to set some sort of standard of white peace? That doesn't even make sense. TPF was on the defensive. How in the nine hells could they be the ones to grant a peace, especially when the coalition was in no position to enforce it?

If the plan was, in some way, to attempt to make SG look like a bunch of pointless warmongers it most certainly failed - incompetent warmongers on the part of one alliance (Athens) but not pointless. If anything, it seems this plan simply made the entire coalition look impotent. Eighteen alliances lined up accomplished what, exactly? SG being let off the hook with an actual stern talking to? Oh no, anything but that. I would be ashamed to have this battle credit on my national ensign.

[Seerow]

You raise an interesting point. By essentially "refusing flank" and placing half (or a bit over half) of their alliances into PM, Athens and Rok presented a rather smaller target. Compound that with traditional "assault" alliances like Valhalla being in what amounted to reserve, and I'm not shocked whatsoever in the small number of DoWs in the initial phases. Had White Peace not happened when it did, you would have seen a radical escalation of the conflict in the next couple of days.

Even with half of Athens/RoK in peace (not sure how accurate that percent is but I'll take your word for it cause I don't feel like looking it up and it's probably close enough), and probably closer to 75% of the attacking alliances in peace, I'd argue it is a disappointment.

Seriously, it averaged to something like 1.3 wars per alliance that declared. Some alliances posted a DoW and didn't put forth a single actual war. Most got only 1. Even if you're fighting conservatively and don't want more than 1 war declared per person to limit the damage of a counter attack, I would expect the alliances to have more than one person online at update to hit. Or even within the next 24 hours. Especially with a 6 day notice.

If the issue was all the active nations being in peace mode, why were the declarations not postponed another day or two, when those peace mode nations were able to come out? You'd already sat on the sidelines for 6 days 1-2 more days couldn't have killed you.

My speculation: TPF et al were genuinely surprised by RoK, Athens, etc agreeing to a white peace early on. Since it was claimed above mhawk was cool to accept white peace and set an example anyway, it seems like war declarations were put up ahead of schedule, so it could look like CoC actually did something (instead of escalating a war to achieve what was already on the table). Really I want to believe this over the alternative: That CoC was really the worst coalition in history.

[watchman]

And the next time I put my trust in a foreign military planner, I will expect, and demand, faster results.

Kzopp, you should put more trust in the experienced, successful and unfailing wisdom of YM.

Well I'll admit I played a key roll in helping our side set up our military plan.

With AUT as the great marshal, how could anything go wrong?

[The AUT]

With AUT as the great marshal, how could anything go wrong?

I dream of the day where I cram 20 of my nukes down your nations throat before AlmightyGrub gets to.

Edited January 5, 2010 by The AUT

[Augustus Autumn]

My speculation: TPF et al were genuinely surprised by RoK, Athens, etc agreeing to a white peace early on. Since it was claimed above mhawk was cool to accept white peace and set an example anyway, it seems like war declarations were put up ahead of schedule, so it could look like CoC actually did something (instead of escalating a war to achieve what was already on the table). Really I want to believe this over the alternative: That CoC was really the worst coalition in history.

The alternative seems more likely considering the slapdash nature of the conflict.

Kzopp, you should put more trust in the experienced, successful and unfailing wisdom of YM.

Who?

With AUT as the great marshal, how could anything go wrong?

Because your prowess on the battlefield is unmatched, Watchman. Lest ye throw stones...